UDAs re shared members and Intersect

I'm INTERSECTing two sets:
Leaf-level from [Entities].CurrentMember and
UDA([Entities],"myuda" (also leaf-level)
This intersection works appropriately on my primary stored hierarchy but not on any of my alternative hierarchies (also stored). It does work when I zoom to the leaf level in the alternate hierarchy but not any of the rollups.
I had assumed the UDA on the shared member (in the alternate hierarchies) would acquire the UDA of its stored member. However, it doesn't appear to be working that way.
Can anyone shed any light on this issue or suggest a different approach?
Thanks,
Barb

We're using shared members in 11.1.1.2, in both dense and sparse dimensions. So, the good news is that it can be done. The bad news is that I'm not sure why you're experiencing this issue.
Will you provide some additional details about the dimension where you're having this issue? Is it in a shared library, or a local library? Is there any chance that the prototype member (the original non-shared member) is set to "NeverShare"? Unfortunately, EPMA will allow users to select certain settings that cause problems downstream. (And sometimes it won't allow perfectly valid settings.)
- Jake

Similar Messages

  • Shared members and dynamic calc

    I am trying to replicate a new cube from current GL cube and wish to remove unused shared members if they have any impact on essbase.
    2/3 of my accounts (dense) member is stored with the remainder being shared members. Shared members do not add to block size. But having so many of them, does it impact on calc scripts or retrievals or any other impacts?
    Secondly, in accounts and divisions, we have four levels. except for level 0, the remaining levels are all dynamic calc. Division is sparse member. Its not advisable to have dynamic calc on dense dimension. What about sparse dimension like division? Will it be better to change level 2&3 to dynamic and change level 1 to store as well?
    We have also been advised by our consultant to change accounts to sparse dimension considering the number of times we need to update outline for new members (stored and shared).
    Dimension          Type          Stored     Shared
    Measure               Dense     1378     796     rest
    Time               Dense     106     13     rest
    Year               Dense     9     8     
    Currency          Sparse     12     9     
    Scenario          Sparse     41     38     
    Market               Sparse     20     12     
    Division          Sparse     490     302     rest
    Product               Sparse     635     308     
    Reportcode          Sparse     327     299

    Hi,
    Having shared members in dense hierarchy will not have much of impact on Cube size or retrieval performance.
    but its always advisable to avoid unnecessary hierarchies (shared or stored or dynamic).
    Having top level dense members as dynamic lines is a good design but having sparse dynamic calc will impact retrieval performance.
    its not at all advisable to make sparse members as dynamic calc but if needed we can make sparse members with very few children as dynamic calc (or dynamic calc & store). yet again its not advisable to have a dynamic calc children to a sparse stored parent as this will affect the batch calculation while aggregating parent sparse member.
    And as suggested by your consultant it is feasible to make the dimension getting modified more often, as a sparse dimension as this will reduce the restructuring time (sparse restructure will take less time compared to dens restructure).
    But that alone cannot be considered as factor as there are many other factors to be considered for making a dimension sparse.
    - Krish

  • Shared members and consolidation processes

    Hi guys,
    I'm working giving support to a HFM application and I need some advice, since I'm a little confused. I have 4 different chart of entities:
    1) ComConsol
    2) Legal
    3) BGroups
    4) Alternate
    I was trying to lock the data of ComConsol in a grid when I realized that the status was CN. I run the consolidation and the status changed to OK. However, Legal, BGroups and Alternate changed their status to CN. When I run the consolidation for Legal, then ComConsol needs to be consolidated again.
    I believe that it could be related to some shared members, but I'm not quite sure.
    Any advice?
    Thank you, guys.

    Hi,
    If u can run the consolidation @ primary hierarchy first and then go for the consolidation of rest of the hierarchies so that u can't see any consolidation changes in primary hierarch after running the consolidation @ alternative hierarchies.

  • Forward Referencing Shared Members and EIS

    I was wondering if there is a way to avoid the forward referencing shared members errors I get when creating an account hierarchy with EIS. I am creating the hierarchy automatically from a parent-child recursive table with no manual maintenance.Thanks in advance

    You have the option of "Deleting the Members First" when you run a Member Load.Only the outline is affected, the data itself remains unaffected until you run a calc. Then it will roll up properly.Good Luck,Tim

  • Shared Members Problem

    Hi,I want to start using the Shared Members option for one of my applications in EAS 7.1.0, but have amended the outline and loaded data but the Shared members are appearing in my data twice, therefore duplicating my sales figures in excel add-in, which isn't what I want, I just want the part to be added once, so almost as if one part doesn't get calculated. Can anyone help me with this?? Many ThanksSarah

    As Sreenivas said, change the consolidation to tilde.However, I would put a word of caution on what/how you do this.Typically, a hierarchy has one "primary" roll-up, where all the members are listed only once, and the hierarchy has an organized rollup. In addition, there may be "alternate" roll-ups. These hierarchies have internal consistencies that roll-up to a given point, but no further.What I mean by this is, that you should consider finding the 'root' location of the shared roll-ups, and mark it as non-aggregating (~), but the shared members themselves should aggregate to provide the alternate hierarchy it's own internal consistency.After working out the reason for the distinction between the main and alternate hierarchies, it becomes fairly obvious that your main roll-up will be 100% of your non-shared members, and the alternates may contain subsets.Example:Product has children "All Products", and "Discount Products", "All Products" will contain them all and aggregate to the Product root member. "Discount Products" contains a subset that aggregate up to itself, but it doesn't aggregate to the Product root member. You may have additional "alternate hierarchies", but only one will be your "full roll-up".Note: This example ignores the use of UDA's or attribute dimensions for doing this same thing, for illustrative purposes.-Doug

  • Shared Members

    Is there any way in which you can use a filter to look at just Shared Members and not the original members?we have looked at this and believe that it is not possible on the basis that whenever you drill down in Excel, you can see the values for the shared members and the original members as well.It would be great to confirm that the above is True, or even better, provide a solution to the problem.

    When you drill down from a parent member, you should be viewing the child members and if that is shared memebers then that is what you will see.The data value of the shared member and the origianl member is always the same. The roll ups will have differnet values. So I am not sure what you mean when you say the shared value and the origianl value are visible. Please clarify.Thanks.

  • Shared members' properties not flowing automatically

    Hi,
    We are developing hierarchies in Drm11.1.2.2
    Wherein we have primary members and also shared members in our hierarchy to be built on ...for the properties part let's say for ex I have description-lob as a local property that inherits a global property description-input ...note:values at global properties not to be changed...hence lob ...when the members are created as primary members with their respective properties... The shared members do not inherit the properties from the primary member... How do we get inherit it automatically... Note: description-lob is a overridden property... Please help me asap with your ideas...
    Thanks

    Hello Scorp,
    I've tried to understand and here's what i understood.. The Description-LOB is a defined Inheriting or probably a Overridable derived property.  Now taking each case differently -
    Note- The Shared members will not "Inherit" the values from their primaries unless they are among its descendants and which typically doesn't make sense from an alternate structure view.
    If it is a defined property it will not reflect on the Shared member automatically, if my memory serves me right the Leaf property is the only one which is common.
    Now having said that, the only possibility is that of a overridable derived property, now for that you need to put in a condition in your formula to check for Shared members separately, Check for the Core.SharedFlag_MDM  which is True for Shared members and False for Primaries you can do something like this.
    If(PropValue(Core.SharedFlag_MDM),
    NodePropValue(PropValue(Core.PrimaryName_MDM),Custom.YourProperty),
    PropValue(Custom.YourProperty))
    Let me know if I have deviated from your question.
    Thanks
    Denzz

  • Financial Reporting Studio - Suppress Shared Members During Entity Prompt

    I am trying to create a Financial Reporting Studio report where the entity members that are displayed as a prompt only reflect the entities the user has access to with only one occurrence in the list. I have tried the following scenarios with no luck.
    In Workspace, the Financial Reporting Preference, the Setup User POV option "Member Selection Displays" is set to "Only Members I Can Access" and not "All Members Regardless of Access".
    The Financial Report is set up so that the user is prompted for the Entity so they can select multiple entities to run the report.
    This works fine, except this is also displaying the shared members in the alternate hierarchies when responding to the Entity prompt.
    As part of Defining the prompt, I have included the main entity structure in the "Choices List" in hopes that the shared members wouldn't display as an option to select, but this ends up displaying all of the entities in the hierarchy overriding what is the Financial Reporting Preference (acts like "All Members Regardless of Access"). I have also tried the Union of "Suppress shared members" and "Same level as" a level zero entity, but I'm still seeing all of the members of the main entity hierarchy, rather than a list of entities the user has access to.
    Is there a way to display all of the entities only once that a user has access to during a prompt for a report? I would greatly appreciate any advice. Thanks in advance!!

    I don't think there's a native way to do this in HFR. How could it be done other than through creating a custom selection list? Okay, I guess that is one way but it hurts my brain to think about maintaining it unless it could maybe be done through IDESCENDANTS of 1 and 2.
    Here are two other thoughts:
    1) Write a report against the Planning (I could be wrong about you using Planning as you specify Essbase, but the question is in the Planning board) tables to get this information. I don't know how to do it, but I'm guessing with some SQL gyrations it should be possible.
    2) Stick an attribute against hierarchies 1 & 2 and report on them that way. You the designer already know that they are related. More maintenance on the front end, but a surefire way to get the member list out.
    Regards,
    Cameron Lackpour

  • Duplicate Member Outline and Loading Shared Members

    I have an outline where I want to allow duplicate member names but in some cases I will need shared members. I am trying to build the outline parent child and I cannot get it to understand the fact that I want a shared member.
    Here is an example:
    [market],east
    [market],west
    [market],other
    [market].[east], nj
    [market].[east], ny
    [market].[west], ca
    [market].[west], lv
    [market].[other],[market].[west].[lv] <--- this should be shared
    [market].[other],ny <--- this should not be shared
    Does anyone know how to do this?

    If you would like to less the charecters and if you are retrieving the data using SQL, then you could using the Substr function to restrict the characters to 80 substr( string, start_position, [ length ] )

  • DRM and Shared Members in Essbase & Planning

    Hi,
    Many years ago we implemented Razza and one of the difficulties we had was in handling shared members in Essbase and Planning applications. The workaround as I recall was to use a prefix in alternate hierarchies, and strip it out before exporting. But this did not allow for a single place to maintain a node. Is there a best practice for handling shared members in DRM?
    Thanks!

    DRM now supports shared members in the application. This application functionality used configurable suffixes. You can read about this in the DRM User Guide.
    This makes Essbase integration virtually seemless since Essbase will treat the first occurance of a member encountered during the dimension load process as the base member and any subsequent occurances of that member as shared members. Planning, however, requires shared members to be marked as such and thus depending on how the hierarchies are maintained in DRM and then exported, it is possible for the shared member to appear before the base member, which will cause Planning to raise an error. This can be accommodated with two pass loads and other techniques.
    Also note that this information could be dated as I haven't personally been on a project that fed hyperion Planning for a couple of years. Regards.

  • ASO - Time Functionality - MDX for Shared Members

    Hi
    I have create an ASO cube with two time hierarchies and I am currently trying to get the WTD To Date Functionality working.
    The hierarchies are as follows
    Hier1: Year->HalfYear->Quarter->Month->Week->Date (Date is stored)
    Hier2: Year->HalfYear->Quarter->Month->Date (Date is shared)
    In Hierarchy 1 the month of Jun contains the following days 27/05 - 30/06 due to the way the weeks fall.
    In Hierarchy 2 the month of Jun contains the following days 01/06 - 30/06 as this shows the actual days in the month of June.
    My problem is, in hierarchy 2, the shared members are taking on the WTD to values of the hierarchy 1 and my MDX is not recalculating for shared members.
    Is it possible to recalculate for shared members?
    Hierarchy1
    Hier1 Value - WTD
    Hierarchy 2
    Hier2 Value - WTD
    Jun-Wk1-27/05/13
    100
    May-27/05/13
    100
    Jun-Wk1-28/05/13
    200
    May-28/05/13
    200
    Jun-Wk1-29/05/13
    300
    May-29/05/13
    300
    Jun-Wk1-30/05/13
    400
    May-30/05/13
    400
    Jun-Wk1-31/05/13
    500
    May-31/05/13
    500
    Jun-Wk1-01/06/13
    600
    Jun-01/06/13
    600 (This should reset back to 100 but instead it is taking on the value from Hierarchy 1 because it is shared)
    Jun-Wk1-02/06/13
    700
    Jun-02/06/13
    700 (This should be the sum of 01/06 +02/06 but instead it is taking the value of Hierarchy 1)
    Below is a sample of the MDX I have
    WHEN IsLeaf([Calendar].[ReportingYear].CurrentMember) AND Count ( Intersect (Descendants([ReportingYear]) ,{ [Calendar].[ReportingYear].CurrentMember  })) > 0
    THEN
    sum((ANCESTOR( [Calendar].[ReportingYear].CurrentMember,1).Firstchild: [Calendar].[ReportingYear].CurrentMember), [View].[Periodic])
    WHEN IsLeaf([Calendar].[CalendarYear].CurrentMember) AND Count ( Intersect (Descendants([CalendarYear]) ,{ [Calendar].[CalendarYear].CurrentMember  })) > 0
    THEN
    /*1*/
    sum((ANCESTOR([Calendar]. [CalendarYear].CurrentMember,1).Firstchild:[Calendar]. [CalendarYear].CurrentMember))
    Thanks
    Michelle

    If you use the IsUda function within an IIF statement then you would have to specify a true part and a false part.IIF (Search condition,true part,false part)

  • How to build shared members using Rules file

    hi all,
    we have a source file like below,in that Bold members are shared member. we doknow how to modify the source file for building shared members using Rules file.
    Conf Total,~,Config A,*Lightbolt 365 A*
    Conf Total,~,Config A,*Lightbolt 540 A*
    Conf Total,~,Config A,*Lightbolt 730 A*
    Conf Total,~,Config A,*Thunderball 365 A*
    Conf Total,~,Config A,*Thunderball 270 A*
    Conf Total,~,Config A,*Roadranger 123 A*
    Can anyone give suggestion to resolve this issue.
    Thanks in Advance

    hi John,
    Here i'm building the dimension through generation build method.
    setting the properties as
    Field, Dimension, Field Type, Field Number
    Field1,Product,Generation,2
    Field2,Product,property,2
    Field3,Product,Generation,3
    Field4,Product,Generation,4
    After mapping it shows dimensions are correctly mapped.
    When i load the source file and the rule file, it shows error partially loaded data,.And it doesn't shows the shared member property. That is what asked How to modify the source file for building shared members using Rules file.
    Thanks,
    Edited by: user@99 on 25-May-2010 15:37

  • How to see Shared Members in Smart View on Ad-hoc Analysis mode

    Hi All,
    We are using Hyperion Planning v 11.1.1.3.
    For the alternate hierarchy we have created shared members. But in Smart View we are unable to see Shared members hierarchy in Ad-hoc analysis mode.
    Is this limitation in Hyperion Planning?
    Or
    Is there any way to see shared members Hierarchy in Smart View in Ad-hoc analysis mode?
    It is urgent requirement Please let me know as early as possible
    Thanks in Advance!!!

    When you say open data form in Ad-hoc mode, can you do that? I think when you select Ad-hoc mode, you are basically connecting to Essbase and therefore need to manually select the members. (of course, I've got a 11.1.2 env right now so not too sure of 11.1.1.3)
    I'm able to just go to Member Selection and select whatever hierarchy i want, Shared or Stored, when I'm connected to Essbase. When connecting to Planning, I dont have any option of opening the form as Ad-hoc mode.
    Can you see the hierarchy if selecting the members using Essbase connection and not planning?
    Cheers,
    Abhishek

  • Family sharing: members can't see others' purchases

    As the head family member, I can see my family members' purchases. But they can't see any shared content. I double-checked the Family Sharing settings and we are all listed under each device. Each person is signed in with the correct id. Sharing is set to "on." I tried logging out and logging in again, downloaded a free app, but it's still not working. Please help!

    Hi magnetic197,
    Lets see if we can get your content to show up on your Family Sharing account. Take a look at the article below for some additional troubleshooting to what you have already done to get it to show up. 
    If you don't see your family's shared content
    http://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201454
    Take it easy. 
    -Norm G. 

  • Level building/shared members

    Can you generate shared members when level building your dimensions?

    I'm afraid I have to disagree with the previous 2 posters. You can build shared members when you use a level build method. I do it all the time. Assume your level zero member is in a primary and secondary rollup and that there are 3 parents in the firs rollup and 2 in the second, the format of the load rule would be:
    Lev0,Lev1,Lev2,Lev3,lev1,Lev2

Maybe you are looking for